... But, the w3c documents point to RFC1766 as well as what was then an Internet Draft but is now RFC3066. The reference to RFC3066 is indirect. Nonetheless, I

Message 1 of 4
, Jan 21, 2004

houghta wrote:

> The RSS 2.0 specification says to use the Netscape
> codes or W3C codes and the W3C codes are based on RFC1766 which is
> based upon ISO 639-1. So my interpretation is that you cannot
> use "mul" (multiple) or "und" (undetermined) from ISO 639-2.

But, the w3c documents point to RFC1766 as well as what was
then an Internet Draft but is now RFC3066. The reference to RFC3066 is
indirect. Nonetheless, I think it is clear that it is intended. (To
see this, follow the footnote in the W3C document.[1] You'll find:

[RFC1766]
"Tags for the Identification of Languages", H. Alvestrand, March
1995.
RFC1766 is expected to be updated byhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts
/draft-alvestrand-lang-tags-v2-00.txt, currently a work in
progress.

Given this, I think it is fair to say that RSS V.20 delegates
the definition of languages tags to W3C and W3C delegated that task to
IETF which incorporates the tags from both ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2
while adding some additional tags and establishing a procedure to
register more. Given this, it really does seem to me that "mul" and
"und" are legal language values for RSS V2.0 as written. Is this
reasonable given the additional explanation above?